Ned's photos

Ruins of Hovedøya Kloster, a 12th century Cistercian monastery on the island of Hovedøya in Norway. I asked my daughter to do like Greenlaw* and she is in the window. Some children were playing hide 'n seek and ran through the scene, leaving some "human fog". The only technical differences between this one and "Hovedøya I" are: f/5.6 instead of f/4.8, and 3 minutes instead of 2.5 minutes. But the character of the highlights and soft focus areas are remarkably different. Both used actinic focus correction. * Many believe that it is Colonel Alexander Greenlaw sitting in the window in this calotype . Trutat variant of a Pélegry calotype. 5x7 Eastman No. 1, Replica of Wollaston meniscus 11:30am sun: LV ~14.5, f/5.6, 3 minutes

Salted paper print of a calotype . Printed 8 October 2017. Strathmore 500 plate finish drawing paper 1% kosher salt, 1% NH4Cl, 0.6% gelatin, 0.5% CA. Sensitized w/ 8% CA, 12% AgNO3. Toned with gold borax and SCN. I asked my daughter to do like Greenlaw* and she is in the window. Also some children were playing hide and seek and ran through the scene, leaving some "human fog" in the gap to the left of the tower.. you can mouse over the note to see it a little better. The only technical differences between this one and "Hovedøya I" are: f/5.6 instead of f/4.8, and 3 minutes instead of 2.5 minutes. But the character of the highlights and soft focus areas are remarkably different... this lens has great potential and will take practice. * Many believe that it is Colonel Alexander Greenlaw sitting in the window in this calotype .

This is part of the fortress and castle in Oslo. From near this view, you can see at least 5 different styles of stonework, from different times when the fortress was added to or repaired. I have another calotype that might show it. Turning the other way, you look out over Oslofjord and the waterfront. It is a wonderful place. I returned to this spot 4 different times during our stay in Oslo, charmed each time by the view and the gate, wall and apple tree. This did not come out as I hoped, but it illustrates something about "actinic focus" so I am posting it anyway. I wrote a lot about actinic focus with the inverted copy . This calotype has convinced me that it matters very much. When I realized I'd made a mistake, I came back the next day and tried again . The conditions were not as good ( it was windy and the sunlight failed ) but I think that one will still make a nice print. Trutat variant of a Pélegry calotype. 5x7 Eastman No. 1, Replica of Wollaston meniscus 4PM overcast but bright diffuse sunlight. LV ~13, f/5.6, 12 minutes forgot to correct for actinic focus Development: 28 August Image is faintly visible at start. 200ml of 0.7% gallic acid, added 2 drops of 12% citric acid and 4 drops of 24% silver nitrate. Seemed to come up slowly at first, even though a faint image was visible. That has happened with every one of these. Perhaps the tannic acid preservative needs to be washed off before the development really starts, which makes them seem to start slowly. It was obviously developing after 5 minutes. Stopped at 35 minutes. I waited until I could not perceive the difference between the levels of lighter and darker stonework on the far castle wall by reflected light ( still easy to see the difference by transmitted light ) and there was detail in the shrubbery.

Yes, another fuzzy-wuzzy. There will be a discussion about actinic focus at the Calotype Society soon, and I think this photograph will help. I forgot to make the focus correction on this one. I came back the next day and made one with actinic focus correction , and I think you can understand much of what I wrote below by comparing the two photographs, although the views are not identical and it was windy during the second one. "Actinic focus" means focusing the light the calotype is sensitive to, rather than the light our eyes can see. We can't see UV light, but that's what the calotype sees most. All modern camera lenses are "achromatic" and focus different kinds of light the same. This is an uncorrected lens, so different colors of light are focused differently. To correct this, I should have moved the lens 3 or 4 mm closer to the calotype. After the correction, the ground glass would look blurry, but the image would have been sharp where I intended on the resulting photograph. But first I'm going to make some comments about what I was hoping to do here, and there's something interesting. First of all, about soft focus. This is an un-coated single element meniscus lens. It has all the aberrations. The original calotypists would never have used the lens this way, they would have stopped way down, everything in reasonable focus and minimal aberrations. They would also have corrected for "actinic focus". But there is also a range of more open apertures where the out of focus areas can be quite beautiful -- and it's not really the same thing as what modern photographers call "bokeh". The transition is more gradual and smooth from the in-focus to out-of-focus areas, with more diffusion and glow; more like how a painter would exclude non-subject detail to enhance the subject or provide aerial perspective. When it's done right it can be lovely, but it's also easy to make something displeasing, and it goes against our culturally ingrained aesthetic that everything in a photograph should be pin-sharp ( even though that's not all all how we see and experience the world! ) In this photograph, I was trying to emphasize the near wall and the apple tree on top of it. I was hoping the mixed stonework on the castle wall behind would be softer but still interesting, and I was trying to render the shrubbery in front more diffuse with nice glow. After framing the scene, I used focus and rear tilt to bring detail out on the wall and tree, and really lovely diffuse highlights in the shrubbery. I made two mistakes. First, the building on the right has too many sharp details and high contrast areas, so it became very distracting. I should have moved closer and excluded it. When the soft-focus effects are in the shrubs, it can look pleasing and help the composition. When the soft-focus effects are on that building with high contrast details, it's jarring. But I do have an excuse: it didn't look that way on the ground glass! Secondly, I forgot to make the actinic focus correction. This scene does not look very much like what I composed and saw with my eyes on the ground glass. I had the front wall and gate pretty sharp, and part of the apple tree perfectly sharp ( I wanted the trunk on the right to stand out starkly ). The castle wall behind was a little soft and the building on the right was a little soft, but neither had really strong swirly or blurry areas.. just a little. I was aware the building on the right was a potential problem, but I was hoping it would be okay - mildly out of focus. This calotype appears to be out of focus everywhere, but if you look closely you can see that there is an area of sharper definition in front of the wall. It goes through the stones on the ground ( 6 or 8 feet in front of the gate ) and it cuts through the shrubbery on the right. That's my composition -- the one that included the wall and part of the tree! But because I forgot to correct for actinic focus, it is shifted forward, in front of what it looked like on the ground glass. Now here's something interesting, and I'm not sure if it is just a coincidence or something real. But the area of sharper definition in the shrubs is exactly the area my attention was on for the soft focus specular highlight glow. I carefully maximized the effect to be right there . Isn't that interesting? So when you are looking at the ground glass on the camera, the places where the highlight glow is most defined is where the actinic light is in focus. I guess that makes some sense. TLDR: because I forgot the correction, the place in the scene with beautiful highlight glow ended up being in focus. The places meant to be in focus ended up blurry. The strongest soft-focus aberrations ended up in unintended places, like the building on the right. Actinic focus correction matters a lot! And finally, I want to mention one more thing about trying to make a soft focus calotype. Looking at where the glow and specular effects are on the ground glass is probably useless. Even though I've only made a few, I've seen enough to realize that strong effects on the ground glass disappear on the calotype. Too much of what your eye sees is in red and yellow and orange light that the calotype is blind to. Our calotypes are sensitive to UV, violet, blue and a little green. But there is still some chromatic separation and some beautiful soft focus effects are possible: you can see it in the shrubbery here and in the backgrounds on the Hovedøya calotypes. I think the key will be experience and developing a feel for how the GG translates to the calotype, and that will only happen with practice.

Calo III was a meeting of folks who make calotypes in Oslo, Norway. On this day we visited the Preus National Museum of Photography in Horten. The museum is located at an old naval facility, also home to the maritime museum for the Norwegian Navy, which is why we are posed on a submarine! The Preus museum was wonderful, and we were privileged to view their copy of The Pencil of Nature as well as a fabulous collection of calotypes and salted paper prints. We received a gracious welcome, and had a very memorable day. Trutat variant of Pélegry calotype process. 5x7 Eastman No. 1, modified velostigmat Mostly sunny and bright. LV ~15, f/5.6, 2 minutes Development: No visible image at start. 1.4g gallic acid in 200 ml DH2O. I've stopped using the strong Greenlaw ANS for these and started adding AgNO3 and citric acid separately. I think it provides a little more control and flexibity. I added 5 drops of 24% AgNO3 and 2 drops of 12% CA. Image came up slowly, stopped at 1hr, 5min. Wash 2x10 min., fix 2 x 10 min in plain hypo ( no Na carbonate, and no darkening ), 3 min. in 1% Na sulfite and then 2 x 10 min wash, with a few drops of 20% citric acid added to each change of wash water. The blister problem is not completely solved, but I think they are smaller and less of a problem if the wash water is slightly acidic.

Salted paper print of a calotype , toned with gold-SCN. Printed 10 February 2018

In Oregon, looking at the eclipse... WHF Talbot made a calotype of an eclipse, I made something kind of silly to remember the day :) Trutat calotype 5x7 Eastman No. 1, Replica of Wollaston meniscus 3 minutes F/8, sun was still partially eclipsed, but pretty much LV 15.

Inverted digi-snap of a calotype. Fun day!

Crop of instant pinhole from about a minute before totality to about a minute after. You can see that the streetlight turned on.

At higher resolution, and in hand, you can see the crescent sun.

tin can solargraph through the day of 21 August 2017 First gaps are probably us going back and forth in front of the camera, setting up binoculars, telescope, chairs, etc.

tin can solargraph through day of 21 August 2017 and a rose enjoying the sunshine

Ruins of Hovedøya Kloster, a 12th century Cistercian monastery on the island of Hovedøya in Norway. Trutat variant of a Pélegry calotype. 5x7 Eastman No. 1, Replica of Wollaston meniscus (some soft focus effects at this aperture) 11:30am sun: LV ~14.5, f/4.8, 2.5 minutes

Inverted digi-snap of a calotype I'll replace this image if/when I make a real print.

Calotype of Akershus Fortress in Oslo, Norway. Last day of our visit, the light was failing and the wind was blowing. Everything was moving except the stones! There are 2 more made near this location from different days, still to be developed. I love that apple tree standing there bravely, and hope the others come out well. Trutat variant of Pélegry Calotype. 5x7 Eastman No. 1, Replica of Wollaston meniscus lens. LV ~12.5, windy, no direct sun. 15 minutes, F/5.6

Inverted digi-snap of calotype.

This was a test of Trutat's variant of a Pélegry calotype. ( Instructions here ) What makes this kind of calotype special is that it uses a preservative, so that the calotype does not need to be used and developed within a day of preparing it. This calotype was prepared on 30 June, the photograph was made about 3 weeks later, and it was developed 3 weeks after that. So this is a very good success. Just before making this photograph, I was practicing actinic focus corrections with an uncoated simple meniscus lens, and I accidentally made the correction for this one which doesn't need it. The correction took away some highlight glow in the foreground. 5x7 Eastman No. 1., modified velostigmat. 3 minutes, f/5.6, some breeze.

Inverted digi-snap of calotype